# Flavored Cigar Ban Inches Forward?



## WyldKnyght

Source: Flavored Cigar Ban Inches Forward?

WASHINGTON -- U.S. Senators Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) and Frank R. Lautenberg (D-N.J.) said that the Senate Appropriations Committee, of which they are members, approved report language that would urge the Food & Drug Administration (FDA) to issue regulations asserting its regulatory authority over tobacco products--including cigars--as part of the 2013 appropriations bill for Agriculture, Rural Development, FDA & Related Agencies. The measure now moves to the full Senate for its consideration.

In 2009, President Obama signed the Family Smoking Prevention & Tobacco Control Act, which expanded the authority of the FDA to regulate all tobacco products. The law banned flavored cigarettes, but not flavored cigars.

"Many companies turned to flavored cigars to help attract and retain young customers. Cigars with candy-like flavorings such as strawberry, watermelon, vanilla and chocolate are marketed to young people, and get them hooked on this deadly and addictive habit at a young age. This provision encourages the FDA to assert its authority and take the necessary steps to curb the use of these dangerous products," claimed Durbin

"The emergence of flavored cigars is a transparent effort by Big Tobacco to work around the new tobacco control law. These flavored cigars are clearly designed to attract young adults and hook the next generation of tobacco users from an early age. This amendment is an important step to ensure the FDA uses its full authority to place reasonable standards on the tobacco industry and keep our kids healthy and safe," Lautenberg claimed.

The Tobacco Control Act gives FDA the authority to regulate the manufacturing, marketing, distribution and levels of tar, nicotine and other harmful products in all tobacco products. The law expanded FDA's authority to include tobacco products such as cigars, pipe tobacco and some forms of dissolvable smokeless tobacco; however, FDA has yet to issue regulations asserting its jurisdiction.

According to Durbin and Lautenberg, although the Tobacco Control Act banned flavored cigarettes, some companies are avoiding the ban by marketing their products as flavored cigars, which are not prohibited by law.

Last year, Durbin and Lautenberg were joined by Senators Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) and Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) in sending a letter to FDA asking it to issue regulations banning flavored cigars. They believe that a ban would help decrease cigar use by children and young adults "by removing these harmful flavored cigars meant to appeal to kids from the marketplace."


----------



## szyzk

D'oh!

_"Many companies turned to flavored cigars to help attract and retain young customers."_

I don't know where these "experts" are getting their info., but kids are not attracted to cigars like they are attracted to cigarettes!!!


----------



## WyldKnyght

Yeah most kids relate Cigars flavoured or not to old fat men???


----------



## Johnny Rock

Banning flavored cigars is no big shakes IMHO, good riddance! 

However, pipe tobacco is a whole other thing. Hope it doesn't come to this.


----------



## szyzk

Here's another thing I don't understand: cigar companies have just about ZERO advertising. It's not like you can open up a People magazine (or Teenbeat - or, in the case of this article saying that it's "CHILDREN" being marketed to, Highlights) and see an add for Acid Kuba Kubas or Heaven Raging Rum Cherubs...

Just about the only place you'll see a cigar advertisement is a) in a cigar-related magazine (and guess what, flavored cigars aren't the only cigars being advertised in those) or b) IN A FREAKING CIGAR STORE (which you need to be 18 to enter unless you're with a parent).

So... Where are all of these advertisements aimed at getting kids to pick up the cigar smoking hobby? And why isn't there a MAJOR OUTRAGE over the stores that are supposedly selling these cigars to minors? I have literally heard NOTHING about that, just that the cigars need to be off the market.

Gah, sorry I'm getting so worked up. Working at a tobacconist obviously makes things like this bug the heck out of me!


----------



## WyldKnyght

szyzk said:


> Here's another thing I don't understand: cigar companies have just about ZERO advertising. It's not like you can open up a People magazine (or Teenbeat - or, in the case of this article saying that it's "CHILDREN" being marketed to, Highlights) and see an add for Acid Kuba Kubas or Heaven Raging Rum Cherubs...
> 
> Just about the only place you'll see a cigar advertisement is a) in a cigar-related magazine (and guess what, flavored cigars aren't the only cigars being advertised in those) or b) IN A FREAKING CIGAR STORE (which you need to be 18 to enter unless you're with a parent).
> 
> So... Where are all of these advertisements aimed at getting kids to pick up the cigar smoking hobby? And why isn't there a MAJOR OUTRAGE over the stores that are supposedly selling these cigars to minors? I have literally heard NOTHING about that, just that the cigars need to be off the market.
> 
> Gah, sorry I'm getting so worked up. Working at a tobacconist obviously makes things like this bug the heck out of me!


Let it out brother!!!


----------



## Johnny Rock

If you walk into just about ANY Gas Station, 7 Eleven, or Drug Store, the tobacco counter SCREAMS flavored cigars. That's about all the advertising they need for teens, IMO.


----------



## szyzk

Johnny Rock said:


> If you walk into just about ANY Gas Station, 7 Eleven, or Drug Store, the tobacco counter SCREAMS flavored cigars. That's about all the advertising they need for teens, IMO.


Two problems: as I stated above, it's the store's responsibility not to sell to minors and premium cigars are getting lumped in with the dry-cured, drugstore brand _things_ that can barely be considered cigars.

Also, we need to be brutally honest - these aren't attractive to children, they're attractive to teenagers... But they're overall a lot less attractive than cigarettes. This just screams somebody getting up-at-arms about some pet project to get their name out there (instead of adding their name to the anti-cigarette coalition) and it seems to me like the way this is worded - _children_ - is a scare tactic to get my grandmother thinking that I'm at work selling cigars to seven year olds.


----------



## gosh

Johnny Rock said:


> Banning flavored cigars is no big shakes IMHO, good riddance!
> However, pipe tobacco is a whole other thing. Hope it doesn't come to this.


How is that not the same damn thing?


Johnny Rock said:


> If you walk into just about ANY Gas Station, 7 Eleven, or Drug Store, the tobacco counter SCREAMS flavored cigars. That's about all the advertising they need for teens, IMO.


Those aren't flavored cigars, those are tobacco laced paper products that are mostly bought by people who don't know any better, or to be used as a wrap.

I get it, lots of cigar smokers think infused smokes are crap (still not quite sure how flavor pipe tobacco gets a pass, but roll it into a cigar and now it's a lady stick). But to equate something like an Acid to a Swisher is the same thing as comparing a Davidoff to a Phillies Blunt. If this crap law passes it will mean ANY cigar with any sort of flavor added, and that definition could be stretched to cover damn near anything that doesn't taste like pure tobacco. Hint of cocoa flavor? Sounds flavored! Espresso aftertaste? Flavored!


----------



## Johnny Rock

17 year old's are considered "Children" by law.

Convenience stores also sell alcohol to "Children", almost never get caught.

The flavored cigars are marketed more aggressively in this demographic.


----------



## GoJohnnyGo

I hadn't even thought of all the white owls, swishers etc.... IMO those aren't bought for smoking. People (namely marijuana users of a lower socio-economic status) buy those to break apart and refill. If the FDA thinks that kids are buying these to smoke right out of the box they are very mistaken. I've never met a person (not saying they don't exist) who legitimately smoked peach white owl's.


----------



## szyzk

Johnny Rock said:


> 17 year old's are considered "Children" by law.


They're considered children unless they break certain laws - then they're charged as adults!

And if you sell alcohol to children, you're actually "supplying a _minor_". Saying that these cigars are marketed to _children_ is another scare tactic to drum up sympathy, plain and simple.



Johnny Rock said:


> Convenience stores also sell alcohol to "Children", almost never get caught.


So why isn't "Senator So-And-So recently proposed legislation regarding the ban of Bud Light _Lime_ and Smirnoff _Blackberry_ Ice?" a major headline?

Also, John, I'm not attacking you - just bouncing ideas off you!


----------



## vert1276

If this happened I would cry:hurt: since it looks like internet sales would really be affected. Since I'm a 50/50 cigar, pipe smoker. Finding premium pipe tobacco at a B&M is pretty much impossible in the Seattle area


----------



## BMack

What I don't understand is that they are pumping the tobacco industry soo hard because it's unhealthy, you see commercials of severe cases of physical disfigurement brought on by tobacco use... Cigarette smoking by young adults and teens has declined by a lot even previous to these adds, yet it's ok to air these sick ads on tv for children to see? You don't see the same ads shown against other harmful activities like alcohol abuse, fatty food abuse, car accidents. I bet a lot more people die each year because of wreckless driving than tobacco use. I bet a LOT more people are suffering health affects from fatty foods than smoking but you don't see diabetic amputations on tv.


----------



## ghe-cl

szyzk said:


> They're considered children unless they break certain laws - then they're charged as adults!
> 
> And if you sell alcohol to children, you're actually "supplying a _minor_". Saying that these cigars are marketed to _children_ is another scare tactic to drum up sympathy, plain and simple.
> 
> So why isn't "Senator So-And-So recently proposed legislation regarding the ban of Bud Light _Lime_ and Smirnoff _Blackberry_ Ice?" a major headline?
> 
> Also, John, I'm not attacking you - just bouncing ideas off you!


There is a lot of reaction and legislation aimed at flavored alcohol. Remember the FourLoco flap and subsequent ban a few months back? Don't be surprised if there's a push to ban flavored alcohol of all kinds. All of this underscores the importance of getting HR1639 approved by Congress so that premium, hand-rolled cigars will not only be exempt from FDA regulation but also recognized as a distinct product that isn't in the same category as drug store cigars and cigarettes.


----------



## Johnny Rock

szyzk said:


> They're considered children unless they break certain laws - then they're charged as adults!
> 
> And if you sell alcohol to children, you're actually "supplying a _minor_". Saying that these cigars are marketed to _children_ is another scare tactic to drum up sympathy, plain and simple.
> 
> So why isn't "Senator So-And-So recently proposed legislation regarding the ban of Bud Light _Lime_ and Smirnoff _Blackberry_ Ice?" a major headline?
> 
> Also, John, I'm not attacking you - just bouncing ideas off you!


The flavored beer is behind a door in the cooler, the flavored tobacco products are out there front and center at the checkout counter.

I just agree that first time smokers are more apt to buy grape flavored cigars than a pack of Marlboro's.

The beer distributor by me just started selling Seneca filtered, flavored cigars at less than $2 a pack. He can't keep them on the shelves.


----------



## TommyTree

The good thing about our deadlocked legislature is that things like this won't pass. The bad thing about our deadlocked legislature is that things like a law removing cigars from the jurisdiction of the FDA won't pass. It seems that we should have added a Constitutionally mandated deadlock into the Constitution from the start.


----------



## TonyBrooklyn

Your tax dollars hard at work!
To bad they can't find a way of banning wasteful spending!


----------



## Josh Lucky 13

szyzk said:


> Here's another thing I don't understand: cigar companies have just about ZERO advertising. It's not like you can open up a People magazine (or Teenbeat - or, in the case of this article saying that it's "CHILDREN" being marketed to, Highlights) and see an add for Acid Kuba Kubas or Heaven Raging Rum Cherubs...
> 
> Just about the only place you'll see a cigar advertisement is a) in a cigar-related magazine (and guess what, flavored cigars aren't the only cigars being advertised in those) or b) IN A FREAKING CIGAR STORE (which you need to be 18 to enter unless you're with a parent).
> 
> So... Where are all of these advertisements aimed at getting kids to pick up the cigar smoking hobby? And why isn't there a MAJOR OUTRAGE over the stores that are supposedly selling these cigars to minors? I have literally heard NOTHING about that, just that the cigars need to be off the market.
> 
> Gah, sorry I'm getting so worked up. Working at a tobacconist obviously makes things like this bug the heck out of me!


Its the 7/11's and convenience stores they see the phillies and swishers and equate them to actual cigars. By younger smokers they mean potheads and others who use them mostly for blunt wraps. Since these are seen in just about every store these have to be the problem. Most of us dont ever buy these these and cringe at the thought of them. The people who are buying them do care about the flavor because it can sometimes help mask what they are really smoking.


----------



## ghe-cl

TommyTree said:


> The good thing about our deadlocked legislature is that things like this won't pass. The bad thing about our deadlocked legislature is that things like a law removing cigars from the jurisdiction of the FDA won't pass. It seems that we should have added a Constitutionally mandated deadlock into the Constitution from the start.


There's actually a decent chance that HR1639 can pass. It's got about 170 cosponsors that range from the most conservative to the most liberal members of the House from both parties. Everyone just needs to keep the pressure up.


----------



## ejgarnut

WyldKnyght said:


> "Many companies turned to flavored cigars to help attract and retain young customers. Cigars with candy-like flavorings such as strawberry, watermelon, vanilla and chocolate are marketed to young people, and get them hooked on this deadly and addictive habit at a young age. This provision encourages the FDA to assert its authority and take the necessary steps to curb the use of these dangerous products," claimed Durbin


He is definitely a DICK durbin

who the hell keeps voting this f'ing moron into office???


----------



## Cmdio

Hope this doesn't go through. My girlfriend likes cigars, but really only flavored ones. Don't know if she'd hang with me all night at the cigar place if she couldn't grab a blondie or a Havana sweet


----------



## Poiseman

Mr. Durbin has the same common sense disfunction as Mayor Bloomburg has on limiting access to soda in NY. What is wrong with these people?? I guess unless you are a congressman or billionnaire politician, you do not get to choose your own path in life. Time to voice our opinions in the form of votes people!


----------



## BrunoBlack

Never tried a 'flavoured cigar' But honestly why would a grown up want a decent cigar to taste like grape or a strawberry?

This does sound a lot like trying to target kids IMO. I got the bug as my house was always filled with the smell of pipes and cigars. It kind of would feel odd not to have the air of pipes and cigars. My father was more into cigars while the grandfather was 50/50. I could not imagine any of our clan ever smelling of cherry or some such.


----------



## tatubom1

It all boils down to some people dont want us to smoke so they are trying to ban any tobacco product in what ever means they can. Just like with the taxes on cigs I mean does anyone really believe it costs any where near $5 to make a pack of cigs? with taxes that is what they are up to in most places but in NY they where at $10 a pack in cartons when i quit cigs. So why are cigs taxed will over 200% to try and force someone else's morals on to others. They tried this with prohibition and it didn't work but some people refuse to learn that they can't force their morals on to everyone. Come on people now they have areas that are outdoors completely in the open that is public property that you are not allowed to smoke in except in designated areas.

:anim_soapbox:

Steeping off my soapbox now sorry i am just tired of smokers being treated as second rate citizens


----------



## BrunoBlack

Time will come that all smokers will be banned even at home. I am lucky in the UK as many of our government types are really into pipes and cigars, both generally in my lifetime have had lower tax than cigarettes. I can buy pipe tobacco for 75% of the price of hand rolling tobacco. I am just hoping its not in my life time that big brother puts his foot down, for good.


----------



## El wedo del milagro

I know two working cowboys, both a little bit older than my middle-aged self, who both love those little tiny flavored cigars. Especially the real cheap ones. Folks might snicker to themselves, but no one says anything, just like they KNOW to not dare touch their hats.

I also know an elderly musician that has been performing locally for decades. He smokes a pipe at home, but around town he smokes those tiny, nasty, cheap flavored cigars. He chain smokes em when he performs.

These guys may have bad taste in yalls judgement, but they are GOOD folks, and these cigars are their choice.

Smokers need to band together. If the cigarette smokers get screwed, and the flavored cigar smokers get screwed, who is next?

I personally, will defend the rights of cigarette smokers. It doesn't matter that I HATE cigarettes with a passion. I have no right to tell others what to do. Maybe tobacco companies are marketing cheap flavored cigars to kids. But banning a product because of that is just wrong. There are other ways to keep em outta the hands of kids. Maybe a 5k$ fine that doubles to 10k$ for the second selling offense, and doubles again to 20k$ for a third and last offense... sell to a kid again and ya lose all rights to sell controlled substances... no tobacco sales, no alcohol sales, no nada. That would make the 7-11 owners sit up and take notice! I only know three people that smoke em, and the youngest is nearly 60. I'll defend the right for folks to smoke tiny, nasty, cheap, flavored cigars.

Wasn't it Ben Franklin who said to the squabbling American colonists during the Revolutionary War, "If we don't hang together, we shall surely hang separately."?


----------



## Nightmare365wj

tatubom1 said:


> It all boils down to some people dont want us to smoke so they are trying to ban any tobacco product in what ever means they can. Just like with the taxes on cigs I mean does anyone really believe it costs any where near $5 to make a pack of cigs? with taxes that is what they are up to in most places but in NY they where at $10 a pack in cartons when i quit cigs. So why are cigs taxed will over 200% to try and force someone else's morals on to others. They tried this with prohibition and it didn't work but some people refuse to learn that they can't force their morals on to everyone. Come on people now they have areas that are outdoors completely in the open that is public property that you are not allowed to smoke in except in designated areas.
> 
> :anim_soapbox:
> 
> Steeping off my soapbox now sorry i am just tired of smokers being treated as second rate citizens


+1

Sorry but I'm going to get upon my conservative-libertarian soap box as well. This great country (whether anyone likes it or not) was founded mainly upon the basic principal of liberty. Liberty means responsible freedom. As long as you are responsible and don't screw up anybody else's business you should be allowed to do what you want. I used to be a pretty ultra conservative until I realized how stupid it is to be completely one sided. It's a complex world that we live in and you can't expect everyone to live as you do. It wasn't until the last century that our politicians (they can't even be considered true figures of government anymore) decided to start controlling the personal aspects of our lives. From legislation of what substances we can choose to consume to how many gallons of water our toilets can flush (true, look it up) we are being slowly but surely whittled down into a society with little to no freedom. I may not personally like or agree with certain things that people do or partake in from sexuality differences to the flavor of their tobacco products but I know that it doesn't directly affect me so I can not make those calls. We survived for hundreds of years just fine without a big "protector" watching over us and our children. Don't let them fool you into thinking we need their guidance, it starts with something small that nobody cares about or can even agree with and then explodes into much much more. I am far from a conspiracy theorist or anti-establishment etc. And I realize I am unable to touch upon even half of what I wish due to breaking the forum by writing a book, I just hope that I can influence some into coming together and looking at the bigger picture. ... (Steps down from box) .... So I smoked a half decent Alec Bradley today lol :biggrin:


----------



## GoJohnnyGo

I've always associated cheap flavored cigars with drug use. Blunts are big joints rolled with cigars that have been split open and the filler removed. ...I had some art major friends in college.


----------



## gogirlanime

*This is ridiculous. I see both sides to this argument. It is very true that younger adults are smoking at earlier and earlier ages although the real problem here is bad parenting. Bad parenting has created all sorts of new rules, laws, ethics, and regulations to the way others live their life. I mean, parents are suing cartoons and claim that they are "teaching my children to be gay" or wizards, or violent. Anyways, to the issue, while I don't agree with this I see why they are doing it. If parents would just teach their children all the risks and let them know how they will be punished if they do smoke and watch who they hang out with, call them (all children have cell phones these days so it's not hard to keep in touch with them) and ask where they are, what they are doing, etc. I grew up healthy and without drugs, pregnancy or cigarette addiction because my parents cared and raised me right. If Obama wants to help prevent teenage smoking he needs to send his funds towards teaching parents how to be better parents*


----------



## A Midnight Maduro

Okay as a younger cigar smoker let me share my experience. I am in college. I don't smoke cigarettes and didn't start with flavored cigars before jumping into premiums. I was attracted to premium cigars so that's where I started never indulged in flavored besides maybe a puff here and there from a friends flavored cigar.

However, tons of my friends back in high school started smoking flavored cigars before cigarettes, then after high school they began smoking cigarettes. The most popular flavored cigar (from my experience) would be "black and mild" cream or wine. That's what all of my friends started smoking mostly. They would frequent the gas station at lunch or after school and buy a cigar. 

Note: these kids inhale their black and milds. 

Also cigarettes are not appealing to those who haven't smoked. School anti tobacco campaigns have made most kids in middle school/highschool hate cigarettes. Cigars on the other hand not so much. The only cigarettes I ever heard kids smoking in highschool were either hand rolled, or American Spirits. Rarely anything else. 

Now i am not saying flavored cigars should be banned, just sharing my own knowledge being a young American myself.


----------



## Spankmeister

GoJohnnyGo said:


> I've always associated cheap flavored cigars with drug use. Blunts are big joints rolled with cigars that have been split open and the filler removed. ...I had some art major friends in college.


I was an "art major" back in the day we used Tampon wrappers, Beer cans, apples, that insert in the Cheech and Chong Big Bambu album all kinds of stuff but never cigars. From time to time a do buy them at the gas station (I admit) a couple of months ago the cashier asked me "do you really smoke these?" So I guess that is a lot of what these are used for. What do I know? I'm an old "art Major".


----------



## Baron_Null

My first post here. As a brand new member, I understand that I'm making my first impressions more than likely more than a bit harsh. I'm sorry if I offend anyone, but this topic riled me up quite a bit.

I've recently started enjoying many different tobacco products. I will admit that I enjoy cheap flavored gas station "cigars" in addition to premium, well crafted, lovingly made "real" cigars. I don't smoke cigarettes, and don't plan to. The fact of the matter is that it insults me when I see things like "As long as it's not my (insert premium flavored) cigar, they can ban all of the (insert cheap gas-station cigar)."

As a reference, my other hobbies focus on firearms. I see the same thing all the time in that community as well. "As long as they don't touch my high-priced hunting rifle, they can ban all of the other guns."

This is a matter of personal liberty. I have the right as much as any adult to enjoy what I will. Just because I have poor tastes doesn't mean I should be punished just because I like a Backwoods cigar every now and then.

I consider cigarettes nasty. I hate the smell of them, and I will never let myself become addicted to such a gross product. However, I'm not going to start telling others that just because I don't like something, they shouldn't either. I'm not going to fight for my right to smoke cigars, and then fight to restrict the rights of others just based on the fact that I consider what they do gross.

And in case you couldn't see the writing on the wall, this isn't about the fact that Phillies cigars are behind the counter of the 7-11. It's about slowly whittling away on our rights to enjoy what we will, until all tobacco is banned- or as close as they can get to it. Rights, for the most part, aren't taken away in one fell swoop, they're taken away one-by-one. This is nothing more than one more right that will be taken away in the name "of the children"


----------



## Ken Hastings

Baron_Null said:


> My first post here. As a brand new member, I understand that I'm making my first impressions more than likely more than a bit harsh. I'm sorry if I offend anyone, but this topic riled me up quite a bit.
> 
> I've recently started enjoying many different tobacco products. I will admit that I enjoy cheap flavored gas station "cigars" in addition to premium, well crafted, lovingly made "real" cigars. I don't smoke cigarettes, and don't plan to. The fact of the matter is that it insults me when I see things like "As long as it's not my (insert premium flavored) cigar, they can ban all of the (insert cheap gas-station cigar)."
> 
> As a reference, my other hobbies focus on firearms. I see the same thing all the time in that community as well. "As long as they don't touch my high-priced hunting rifle, they can ban all of the other guns."
> 
> This is a matter of personal liberty. I have the right as much as any adult to enjoy what I will. Just because I have poor tastes doesn't mean I should be punished just because I like a Backwoods cigar every now and then.
> 
> I consider cigarettes nasty. I hate the smell of them, and I will never let myself become addicted to such a gross product. However, I'm not going to start telling others that just because I don't like something, they shouldn't either. I'm not going to fight for my right to smoke cigars, and then fight to restrict the rights of others just based on the fact that I consider what they do gross.
> 
> And in case you couldn't see the writing on the wall, this isn't about the fact that Phillies cigars are behind the counter of the 7-11. It's about slowly whittling away on our rights to enjoy what we will, until all tobacco is banned- or as close as they can get to it. Rights, for the most part, aren't taken away in one fell swoop, they're taken away one-by-one. This is nothing more than one more right that will be taken away in the name "of the children"


Great first post. It's put a frog in boiling water and he will jump out. Put him in cold water and you can slowly raise the temp until he is boiled to death. The anti's want a total ban.


----------



## purepoker

Baron_Null said:


> My first post here. As a brand new member, I understand that I'm making my first impressions more than likely more than a bit harsh. I'm sorry if I offend anyone, but this topic riled me up quite a bit.
> 
> I've recently started enjoying many different tobacco products. I will admit that I enjoy cheap flavored gas station "cigars" in addition to premium, well crafted, lovingly made "real" cigars. I don't smoke cigarettes, and don't plan to. The fact of the matter is that it insults me when I see things like "As long as it's not my (insert premium flavored) cigar, they can ban all of the (insert cheap gas-station cigar)."
> 
> As a reference, my other hobbies focus on firearms. I see the same thing all the time in that community as well. "As long as they don't touch my high-priced hunting rifle, they can ban all of the other guns."
> 
> This is a matter of personal liberty. I have the right as much as any adult to enjoy what I will. Just because I have poor tastes doesn't mean I should be punished just because I like a Backwoods cigar every now and then.
> 
> I consider cigarettes nasty. I hate the smell of them, and I will never let myself become addicted to such a gross product. However, I'm not going to start telling others that just because I don't like something, they shouldn't either. I'm not going to fight for my right to smoke cigars, and then fight to restrict the rights of others just based on the fact that I consider what they do gross.
> 
> And in case you couldn't see the writing on the wall, this isn't about the fact that Phillies cigars are behind the counter of the 7-11. It's about slowly whittling away on our rights to enjoy what we will, until all tobacco is banned- or as close as they can get to it. Rights, for the most part, aren't taken away in one fell swoop, they're taken away one-by-one. This is nothing more than one more right that will be taken away in the name "of the children"


:welcome: and :amen: Great post, RG for you!


----------



## Drake Marino

Baron_Null said:


> My first post here. As a brand new member, I understand that I'm making my first impressions more than likely more than a bit harsh. I'm sorry if I offend anyone, but this topic riled me up quite a bit.
> 
> I've recently started enjoying many different tobacco products. I will admit that I enjoy cheap flavored gas station "cigars" in addition to premium, well crafted, lovingly made "real" cigars. I don't smoke cigarettes, and don't plan to. The fact of the matter is that it insults me when I see things like "As long as it's not my (insert premium flavored) cigar, they can ban all of the (insert cheap gas-station cigar)."
> 
> As a reference, my other hobbies focus on firearms. I see the same thing all the time in that community as well. "As long as they don't touch my high-priced hunting rifle, they can ban all of the other guns."
> 
> This is a matter of personal liberty. I have the right as much as any adult to enjoy what I will. Just because I have poor tastes doesn't mean I should be punished just because I like a Backwoods cigar every now and then.
> 
> I consider cigarettes nasty. I hate the smell of them, and I will never let myself become addicted to such a gross product. However, I'm not going to start telling others that just because I don't like something, they shouldn't either. I'm not going to fight for my right to smoke cigars, and then fight to restrict the rights of others just based on the fact that I consider what they do gross.
> 
> And in case you couldn't see the writing on the wall, this isn't about the fact that Phillies cigars are behind the counter of the 7-11. It's about slowly whittling away on our rights to enjoy what we will, until all tobacco is banned- or as close as they can get to it. Rights, for the most part, aren't taken away in one fell swoop, they're taken away one-by-one. This is nothing more than one more right that will be taken away in the name "of the children"


This.

These anti-everything groups are well organized and well funded. They don't just fight to get one thing regulated and/or banned. Once they win they keep going for more. One cannot be complacent simply because you're unaffected by the legislation, because odds are, you're next on the chopping block.

If you make a deal with tyranny it will always get worse.


----------



## Livin' Legend

I can honestly say that I've never felt like I was being "marketed to" in regards to cigars. As has been said, the only cigar advertisements I see are in cigar stores, cigar websites, and cigar magazines, and even as an adult, it never even crossed my mind that flavored cigars were an effort to attract minors.

What baffles me is that you don't even need to be THAT savvy when it comes to cigars to know that even if they were trying to get kids to buy cigars, they aren't exactly addicting the way cigarettes are. In my mind, cigarettes serve only one function: nicotine delivery. In the case of cigars, you aren't really guaranteed a lifelong addicted customer, unless they all out inhale, and even with quite a few sticks under my belt, I think I'd consider putting the hobby aside if I ever had the misfortune to actually inhale one.

This is just the usual wrongheaded political nonsense. Career politicians trying to justify their existence by harassing the people they're supposed to be serving. Not EVERYTHING needs a freaking law.


----------



## Bondo 440

Livin' Legend said:


> This is just the usual wrongheaded political nonsense. Career politicians trying to justify their existence by harassing the people they're supposed to be serving. Not EVERYTHING needs a freaking law.


----------

